You Can’t Have it All

Our children deserve attentive, involved parents.

Anne-Marie Slaughter, the former dean of Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, and more recently, the first female director of policy planning at the State Department, unleashed a firestorm with her article, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” in the July/August issue of the Atlantic.

Ms. Slaughter explains that she left government because, despite an incredibly supportive and helpful husband, she felt that her teenage son needed her presence at home.

In speaking engagements, she has acknowledged that she couldn’t be the kind of employee her job demanded and simultaneously the kind of parent her children required, whatever her feminist training had led her to believe and however much some of her female counterparts felt betrayed by her position – and her honesty!

Kudos to Ms. Slaughter for having the courage to speak out. I applaud that. Unfortunately I think she misses or glosses over two important points.

She suggests that women could, in fact, “have it all” if only the economy were restructured to reflect a greater appreciation of the important role of parenting and the crucial need for work-life balance. If only employers and businesses were more accommodating. I think this is a naïve and unrealistic point of view, perhaps (I apologize Professor Slaughter) a childish view of life.

If only the system were changed, if only motherhood was more appreciated, if only I won a million dollars, if only, if only…we all have a wish, or shall I say fantasy, list. But part of maturity is recognizing that life is full of tough choices, that no one can actually have it all, and that we create ourselves, our personhood, our unique being, through the choices we make.

Life has trade-offs, but we decide what's "worth it."

If we choose to become an expert in a particular area of study, we are closing off others. If we spend hours training to be a hockey player, we have ruled out a future in baseball.

But of course it gets more serious and more complicated. When we get married, we are narrowing many of our options – no other intimate relationships, someone else to be responsible for and to, another person to consult on decisions, another’s needs to take into account. We can’t just run off whenever and wherever we feel like it. Our finances our shared, our social lives merged. There are sacrifices and trade-offs that we have decided are worth it. But we certainly can’t “have it all.”

Once we have children, we also foreclose certain possibilities and deepen our responsibilities. If we didn’t already “find ourselves,” the moment has passed. Our children need us and they need stability. We may have to put the fancy vacation on hold to pay for their education, or camp, or even food and clothing. We may no longer to be able to leave a frustrating job to pursue a fancy, a whim, or even a passion because there are people counting on us, people dependent on us, people over whose lives we have accepted responsibility.

We may not be able to commute to Washington DC, work long, demanding hours, and then return home on weekends to be a bright and energetic mom. Life has trade-offs. Our choices have consequences. The problem isn’t the American economy’s distorted priorities. It’s too easy to try to assess blame and point a finger. But the real change is to face reality – and deciding who you really want to be. Because you can’t be everyone and everything.

There is another downside to the career choice that Ms. Slaughter gives cursory mention.

“…I realized that I didn’t just need to go home. Deep down, I wanted to go home. I wanted to be able to spend time with my children in the last few years that they are likely to live at home, crucial years for their development into responsible, productive, happy, and caring adults. But also irreplaceable years for me to enjoy the simple pleasures of parenting – baseball games, piano recitals, waffle breakfasts, family trips, and goofy rituals. My older son is doing very well these days, but even when he gives as a hard time, as all teenagers do, being home to shape his choices and help him make good decisions is deeply satisfying.”

I wish she’d spent more than a paragraph on this point. It’s not just that our children need us. We need them. We are missing out on one of life’s most precious gifts if we aren’t around to raise our children and interact with them. Is it necessarily anti-feminist to acknowledge the pleasure in child-raising? Or to note, as is frequently pointed out, that no one looks back on their lives and wishes they had worked more.

It’s not just that our children need us. We need them.

Work-life balance is a struggle both for men and women. Financial realities may deny some the luxury of stay-at-home parenting. We all have choices to make along the spectrum. How much money is necessary? How many hours do I really need to work? And what price am I ultimately willing to pay? Who is the person I want to become? And what are the choices that will get me there?

I’m glad that Anne-Marie Slaughter has given this dirty little secret the press it warrants. Our children deserve attentive, involved parents. And we shouldn’t rob ourselves of the pleasure and the growth earned in the playing that role. Our free will choices make us the people we are today. It’s not easy to choose wisely. It wouldn’t be meaningful if there wasn’t a struggle, if there weren’t complicated and tough choices – and trade-offs and costs. This is the human condition and we need to pray we make the choices that will lead us to become the adults, spouses, parents and workers that we are truly proud to be.

About the Author

Emuna Braverman has a law degree from the University of Toronto and a Masters in in Clinical Psychology with an emphasis on Marriage and Family Therapy from Pepperdine University. She lives with her husband and nine children in Los Angeles where they both work for Aish HaTorah. When she isn''t writing for the Internet or taking care of her family, Emuna teaches classes on Judaism, organizes gourmet kosher cooking groups and hosts many Shabbos guests. She is the cofounder of www.gourmetkoshercooking.com.

Visitor Comments: 30

(19)
Anonymous,
July 9, 2012 5:49 AM

what is child care considered to be?

Are we talking day care centers here? If we are, then, yes, I do understand the stress reported. There are often too many kids to a care provider. There is also the physical stress of being shlepped out at an early hour in the morning in ALL types of weather, spending the day outside your own things, your own home and coming back at exhausted at a late hour. In short, the child is going to work because the parent is going to work. It does not learn how to develop it's own resources and imagination among it's own things.When they're not in a crowded environ, they don't know what to do with themselves The child does not have the development to deal with the stress of going to work. They also have the stress of getting sick more because they will be with more chidren at a young age. Not a good situation.
I felt I needed to work. I couldn't be dependent on a spouse's income. What if something G-d forbid did happen? I also felt it made us unequal if I am not contributing to income as well as household things. If he has to be involved with kids and earn a living...don't I, as well, have to do those things?Also I found I was NOT giving my kids attention when I was home. I was too busy cleaning the house. I do more when I have help with childcare and housecare. THEN when I am home, I CAN teach my children etc. I was home for the first four months of my kids lives. I hired a sitter to watch them AT HOME. I stayed around the first month to make sure things were working out. My husband adjusted his schedule to be home on Fridays. In 20 degree weather, I went to work but my kids could sleep secure in their home. Thank G-d. People have to do what works and sometimes daycare is the only option. I do feel that it is a last resort, though.

(18)
Donna,
June 30, 2012 2:49 AM

Excellent article. I too struggled with the choices that Ms Slaughter had. I wanted to work, and I needed to be seen to have current skills in the job market. My late husband was considerably older than I was, and I went into marriage, and chose to have children knowing that I would only be home with them until they were 12 years old. As it turned out, I had to train for another career by the time my youngest child was 5 years old (my husband had lied about his age on both his passport and C.V.) but I don't regret the time I had at home to train, educate and play with my children.

(17)
Anonymous,
June 29, 2012 10:18 AM

This question does not have an easy answer, so I hope we will stop acting otherwise. Re: Mothers who wok inside vs. outside of the home. There has been more than one stay at home mother who did NOT give her child/children the love and nurturing each child needs in order to thrive. I wonder what people have to say about that phenomenon. Also, the phrase "having it all" has been blown way out of proportion. We ALL make trade-offs. My father was an attorney who was home for dinner every night. He did not make a billion dollars, but that was not his goal in life. His choice enabled him to balance a fulfilling legal career with a satisfying family life. We women are asking for no less than what my father was able to achieve.

(16)
Molly,
June 29, 2012 6:00 AM

I respect your difference of opinion on where the research points re: day care. Are you not aware of the NICHD study? It was quite well respected, and national. I also want to point out that *many* babies with working mothers thrive. It is also true that center based care should be a last resort for children under three. I find it baffling that you would expect a child to get more responsive care when he is one of 6-12 toddlers per two adults instead of one or two with one mother. As I'm sure you know, children under three do best when a caregiver is responsive and can bond with them long term. This can certainly happen in many care situations, but is unlikely in a typical center. That is why I am against encouraging mothers to work outside the home if they would not otherwise choose it. I'm not sure how you missed the overwhelming evidence in that regard, but I assure you, I have never gotten my information from "Focus on the Family".

(15)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2012 4:44 AM

Why can't there be serious part time work for women w/ kids?

Just my opinion: I searched desperately for a part time job in my field (graphic design), as I had 8 children, 5 still at home, the youngest three years old and 3 college-age, when my husband was killed in a terrible highway crash. There were no part time jobs, not one, zilch. I was seriously being considered for a position that expected a 50 hour work week and trips to China. That obviously wouldn't work for me. If there were part-time jobs, women could work and still be there for their kids.
Can anyone explain to me why our system is this way?

Molly,
June 29, 2012 6:06 AM

Yes, I agree completely. There are so many women working full time who really want to cut back a few hours. There are also women at home who would like to fit in some work, but are not able to work 40-50 hours a week. There is very little understanding of the needs of women balancing a family and paid work. No employer should assume that their employees are available 24/7, yet so many do.

(14)
Bonnie,
June 27, 2012 11:00 PM

If you are doing it all, you can't take care of yourself!

As a mother of four, I am greatful I was able to run my house efficiently, make nutritious meals and of cousre be there for them. I know many moms who worked and raised nice kids. But these moms were so overloaded, they had no time for exercise or proper rest. With four kids I too was overwhelmed, but to add 8 extra hours of work to my already busy life would have pushed me over the edge.

Anonymous,
June 29, 2012 6:09 AM

Yes, I know many women who work very hard to work for pay and keep the home running smoothly, but it would never work for me. I wake up at 6 am as it is, so I'm plenty tired "just" being a mother to five kids! I can't imagine how exhausted I'd be if I was also trying to meet the demands of a job.

(13)
Liora,
June 27, 2012 3:18 PM

The Feminine Mistake

I agree with a previous poster about part-time professional work while kids are under 6; part-time work is ideal as it allows for ample family time while still bringing in an income to the family and allowing the mother to keep up her professional skills and have some adult interaction during the day. Once kids are in school from 8--3:30, there is no reason why mom can't use those eight hours to earn an income, especially with he internet allowing for many work from home jobs.
Now, let me just state that I am NOT a feminist. However, I strongly recommend that everyone who is a woman read The Feminine Mistake by Leslie Bennetts. She goes into detail about the economic devastation of homemakers (many of whom have professional degrees) after their husbands divorce them, die, lose their jobs, etc. Don't say it can't happen to you: the divorce rate is 50% these days, and even in the frum community, people get divorced as well. If you take 10 years off from a career, no employer will hire you back. Think of you children: what will happen to them if your husband loses his job? If he suddenly dies? Do you want them to starve? Scale down to part-time while your kids are young if it gives you more breathing room. However, don't completely give it up--always keep your foot in the job market door.

(12)
Molly,
June 27, 2012 5:31 AM

Another study points out that babies and toddlers in center based care have physical symptoms of extreme stress. Please read: Watamura SE, et al, Morning to afternoon increases in cortisol concentrations for infants and toddlers in childcare, ages differences and behavior correlates. (2003)
I'm sure you will be shocked and amazed when you actually read some of the studies that have collected over the effects of childcare for young children. I'm hoping that you will take the time to actually go to the primary sources, rather than assuming that a female working-mom journalist is going to spin the story without bias.

L.,
June 27, 2012 3:00 PM

Biased sources

With all due respect, I am a PhD social psychologist trained in social research. The only "proof" of kids doing better with at-home moms is funded by Christian organizations such as "For the Family". Many, many ultra-orthodox women in my area here work and have 4 kids, and their kids are very well behaved and bright.

(11)
Eric,
June 27, 2012 2:26 AM

Heaven and hell

She reminds me of some I know who want heaven, and all it offers, but also want hell, and all it's pleasures. You may think you can have both, but you cannot.

(10)
Julia,
June 26, 2012 10:13 PM

nobody can handle it all

In the past, the desire to have it all was understandable; women had limited opportunities, and "having it all" sounded nice. But today, I think many women, and men, actually CAN have it all...but can they HANDLE it all, at least at the same time? There are only 24 hours in a day, and even the most energetic person has only a limited amount of energy. Women, and men, have to set their priorities before having kids.

(9)
Barbara,
June 26, 2012 7:21 PM

Wow, so much to respond to.

First of all, thank you Emuna for making the point that we mothers need our children, and that we would be missing out on a lot of joy and fulfillment if we miss out on our kids' growing up years. I was a stay-at-home mom for 10 years with my kids. I loved every minute. And some friends still tell me how "scared" they are for me, that I'll fall apart when my kids get married, as if I don't have a life without my kids. I think they're jealous.
And to another commenter: I disagree. I think children of stay-at-home moms are far ahead of their peers who come home to an empty house and a cold sandwich. My kids are the tops in their classes, every class. Did great in preschool, are high in math. I don't regret 1 minute of staying home, nor 1 minute I give to be with my children. Golly, what did we have them for if not to love and care for them?

Anonymous,
June 27, 2012 3:03 PM

Not quite

I grew up with a working mom, and I NEVER came home "to an empty house and a cold sandwich". I was in school for 8 hours a day (8-3:30) during which time my mother managed to earn an income. If the kids are in school for 8 hours a day, why does it matter if mom is sitting in an empty house versus in an office? Parenthetically, should your breadwinner spouse divorce you, get sick/injured, or die (Hash V'Shalom), you and your children will become burdens on the tax payers.

Barbara,
July 1, 2012 1:39 PM

Yes quite.

You may not be aware that the school day here in Israel is 8:30 -1:15, so yes, children come home to an empty house and a cold sandwich. Parenthetically, my breadwinner spouse *did* divorce me, and my kids and I are managing by living a very simple life and my working part time.

(8)
Rachel,
June 26, 2012 7:08 PM

policy changes should be open for discussion

Most European countries, and many less-developed nations, have a better system of free early childhood education, paid parental leave, paid vacations, etc. So stating that it would be better for the U.S. society to move in this direction is not akin to wishing for a million dollars from the lottery.
Interestingly, wealthy countries tend to be those in which women have access both to skilled work AND to high-quality, affordable child care. It's "either/or" in the U.S. by default -- which is also a political/social choice.

(7)
Anonymous,
June 26, 2012 5:47 PM

Part time professional jobs

Why is no one talking about the lack of PART-TIME work, particularly for professional women? 8 out of ten mothers in my new moms group agreed that what they really wanted, at least until their children where in school (if not longer), was the ability to use the experience and education in a part-time position.
Guess what, if full time work is hard to find in this economy is hard to find, part time work (that pays enough to justify paying a babysitter) is even harder.
Creating the opportunity for more mothers and fathers to work part time, especially professionals (there are very few truely part-time attorneys, for example) would really represent having "a little of it all" to many. In addition, it would keep professional women in the workplace--I've been out 3 years already and have no idea who would hire me in year or two...

Barbara,
June 27, 2012 2:45 AM

Amen, anonymous!

Hear hear, sister! When my kids were young, I longed for the same thing: part-time professional work. I couldn't believe the rigid thinking, which apparently hasn't changed much, if at all. The thinking was "if you're a professional, you work all the time. Part-time work = clerical work." So narrow-minded. It makes so much sense to have part-time professional work available.

(6)
Kerry,
June 26, 2012 2:40 PM

What about single parents??

I was a single mother, worked, paid a mortgage, raised a son, cared for two large dogs and two cats, did all the house and yard work.
50% of women fit my profile. Where on earth do you live?
Guess what, my son makes bank (6 figures) because he learned about a work ethic.

John,
June 26, 2012 4:19 PM

You sound like you are twelve. I don't believe you

For that reason. Someone who had been through all of that would have learned to respect others beliefs. 50% of women were not single when you claim to be a single mother. I could go on about you made up single motherhood, but I won't . I know a women who did what you describe. She was not proud of it, she did it because she had no other choice. She would have prefered her husband go help and treated her kindly. She is 80. She did do it, you are 12 and you did not

(5)
Anonymous,
June 26, 2012 2:39 PM

Wow. That was said so eloquently. Thank you

(4)
yael,
June 26, 2012 2:25 PM

What is the point?

What is the point of this article? Every woman who goes to work is fully aware of these struggles and the choices and sacrafices. Women who espouse the importance of staying home despite the career sacrifices and monetary sacrifices often tend to come off as "better than the rest" because they are sacrificing and making the hard decision.

(3)
ann,
June 26, 2012 8:14 AM

YES THERE IS A CHOICE

people today say"i must work hard, there is no choice"! that's untrue, God gives us the choice! thank you for this "emet" article!
even if it doesn't suits everyone (see the reactions to an article on women work and family balance! they are wild against people who stay at home!!)

Baruch Ben-Yosef,
June 26, 2012 4:49 PM

CHOICES

"God gives us the choice" but does not pay our bills. For that, we must work. (Genesis: "By the sweat of your brow you will eat bread.") The hard part is coming up with an appropriate work-life balance. Trying to "have it all' is unrealistic and immature.

(2)
Molly,
June 26, 2012 5:52 AM

I loved this article, but I just wanted to point out how much I hate hearing about "the luxury of stay-at-home parenting". I planned for and sacrificed for this career, just like people of all professions. I put my husband through grad school so that we could afford for me to stay home. This silly idea is akin to saying that some people don't have the "luxury" of a college degree. If you want it badly enough, you will figure out how to get it.

(1)
Molly,
June 26, 2012 5:43 AM

Why should all of society come together to make the world worse for children? Children thrive when raised by family members, not paid strangers. Yes, there are many great moms who are also working moms. But society does not owe you anything for this choice. I fail to see why I should be forced to give financial, or even verbal support to someone whose goal in life is to blend working for pay and mothering. I do not ask for additional support to stay at home with my children. Now, if we are talking about making the world better for ALL families, that is something I can get behind.

anonymous,
June 26, 2012 2:01 PM

where do you get your facts from?

I am a professional social psychologist working on a PhD. There is absolutely no social science evidence that proves that children thrive more with a stay at home mom. In fact, many studies have proven the opposite; that children of at-home moms are behind verbally, mathematically, and have a harder time adjusting to preschool.

Molly,
June 27, 2012 5:07 AM

Well, the large scale NICHD study, among many, many others. No, human children are not "behind" if they are raised by family members instead of strangers. The whole point of daycare is raising children more cheaply and efficiently. This means economics of scale. This means that children at daycare have far less one-on-one interaction with adults. This makes the children pushy, rude, and tense when it comes to getting their needs met. Yes, if this is the goal, then my children are "behind". Since you know so much about the topic, why don't you remind yourself that, time and again, those "gains" are found to have disappeared by third grade or so.
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/news/releases/child_care.cfm

Shira,
June 27, 2012 4:44 PM

that's not the correct measurements

You are using the wrong yardstick to measure the benefits of stay-at-home mothering for young children. Of course kids who are not in daycare since 6 weeks have more trouble adjusting to preschool. They are used to being one of 20 in a room! The real and lasting benefit is in the crucial area of developing a sense of personhood, self-esteem resulting from intensive positive interaction with the mother. On the other hand, the stay at home mom can also have the knowledge of her child and the time to discipline effectively, so that the child learns boundaries. It is convenient and conventional to shove under the carpet the crucial years of 0-3, which is the foundation for the school years and beyond. While you can point to children who have survived daycare none the worse for wear, as a teacher I see the kids who have become tough, or are overly needy due to the lack of attention and discipline that can easily happen when kids are in an institutional daycare.
My children knew i was always there for them, as I knew my mother was always there for me. That is security beyond measure.

I live in rural Montana where the Cholov Yisrael milk is difficult to obtain and very expensive. So I drink regular milk. What is your view on this?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Jewish law requires that there be rabbinic supervision during the milking process to ensure that the milk comes from a kosher animal. In the United States, many people rely on the Department of Agriculture's regulations and controls as sufficiently stringent to fulfill the rabbinic requirement for supervision.

Most of the major Kashrut organizations in the United States rely on this as well. You will therefore find many kosher products in America certified with a 'D' next to the kosher symbol. Such products – unless otherwise specified on the label – are not Cholov Yisrael and are assumed kosher based on the DOA's guarantee.

There are many, however, do not rely on this, and will eat only dairy products that are designated as Cholov Yisrael (literally, "Jewish milk"). This is particularly true in large Jewish communities, where Cholov Yisrael is widely available.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein wrote that under limited conditions, such as an institution which consumes a lot of milk and Cholov Yisrael is generally unavailable or especially expensive, American milk is acceptable, as the government supervision is adequate to prevent non-kosher ingredients from being added.

It should be added that the above only applies to milk itself, which is marketed as pure cow's milk. All other dairy products, such as cheeses and butter, may contain non-kosher ingredients and always require kosher certification. In addition, Rabbi Feinstein's ruling applies only in the United States, where government regulations are considered reliable. In other parts of the world, including Europe, Cholov Yisrael is a requirement.

There are additional esoteric reasons for being stringent regarding Cholov Yisrael, and because of this it is generally advisable to consume only Cholov Yisroel dairy foods.

In 1889, 800 Jews arrived in Buenos Aires, marking the birth of the modern Jewish community in Argentina. These immigrants were fleeing poverty and pogroms in Russia, and moved to Argentina because of its open door policy of immigration. By 1920, more than 150,000 Jews were living in Argentina. Juan Peron's rise to power in 1946 was an ominous sign, as he was a Nazi sympathizer with fascist leanings. Peron halted Jewish immigration to Argentina, introduced mandatory Catholic religious instruction in public schools, and allowed Argentina to become a haven for fleeing Nazis. (In 1960, Israeli agents abducted Adolf Eichmann from a Buenos Aires suburb.) Today, Argentina has the largest Jewish community in Latin America with 250,000, though terror attacks have prompted many young people to emigrate. In 1992, the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires was bombed, killing 32 people. In 1994, the Jewish community headquarters in Buenos Aires was bombed, killing 85 people. The perpetrators have never been apprehended.

Be aware of what situations and behaviors give you pleasure. When you feel excessively sad and cannot change your attitude, make a conscious effort to take some action that might alleviate your sadness.

If you anticipate feeling sad, prepare a list of things that might make you feel better. It could be talking to a specific enthusiastic individual, running, taking a walk in a quiet area, looking at pictures of family, listening to music, or reading inspiring words.

While our attitude is a major factor in sadness, lack of positive external situations and events play an important role in how we feel.

[If a criminal has been executed by hanging] his body may not remain suspended overnight ... because it is an insult to God (Deuteronomy 21:23).

Rashi explains that since man was created in the image of God, anything that disparages man is disparaging God as well.

Chilul Hashem, bringing disgrace to the Divine Name, is one of the greatest sins in the Torah. The opposite of chilul Hashem is kiddush Hashem, sanctifying the Divine Name. While this topic has several dimensions to it, there is a living kiddush Hashem which occurs when a Jew behaves in a manner that merits the respect and admiration of other people, who thereby respect the Torah of Israel.

What is chilul Hashem? One Talmudic author stated, "It is when I buy meat from the butcher and delay paying him" (Yoma 86a). To cause someone to say that a Torah scholar is anything less than scrupulous in meeting his obligations is to cause people to lose respect for the Torah.

Suppose someone offers us a business deal of questionable legality. Is the personal gain worth the possible dishonor that we bring not only upon ourselves, but on our nation? If our personal reputation is ours to handle in whatever way we please, shouldn't we handle the reputation of our nation and the God we represent with maximum care?

Jews have given so much, even their lives, for kiddush Hashem. Can we not forego a few dollars to avoid chilul Hashem?

Today I shall...

be scrupulous in all my transactions and relationships to avoid the possibility of bringing dishonor to my God and people.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...